Every living thing that exists has energy that integrally supports the life process in all its aspects—the material operations of the physical body, the functions of the emotions and mind, and even the spiritual life. Every individual has a different energy pattern and growth potential that fluctuates through each day and throughout the individual's lifetime. To be able to take advantage of or to recognize the fluctuations in one's energy levels could greatly increase the individual's productivity and well-being, both at work and at home, and would enhance the individual's growth. The prior art discusses different ways of assessing an individual's energy and potential for growth; however, such assessments are not necessarily an exact science. Indeed, the intension of the prior art is to identify a method that quantifies the energy pattern and/or growth potential of an individual. The prior art recommends that an “energy healer” (denoted as “facilitator” herein) or one skilled in the art of addressing an individual's energy to diagnose or address an individual's energy functions and potential dysfunctions and to use the combination of the healer's and individual's own experiences to direct the individual's energy into the individual's ‘functional’ or ‘preferred” energy field. Energy healing encompasses a large array of slightly different therapies including but not limited to: Psychology, Healing Touch, Reflexology, Biofield Therapeutics, Therapeutic Touch, Reiki, and Chi Gung Therapy. However, none of these therapies provide a quantitative approach in both assessing an individual's energy pattern and providing direction or focus to an individual's preferred energy pattern. Such a quantitative approach is needed and the present invention supplies a needed approach.
Terms And Definitions (In Alphabetical Order)
                (Note: terms bolded and italicized in this section are also defined in this Terms and Definitions section)        
Attitudinal Trait Description                A description that represents a user's likely (denoted as “most like” herein) or unlikely (denoted as “least like” herein) behavior or attitude (e.g., behaves as if he/she needs, or prefers—plenty of time for complex decisions). Refer to Appendix A, and FIG. 31.        
Autobiography                The autobiography stores the user's written journal entries based on questions (denoted as “autobiography statements” herein) that elicit a response from the user wherein the questions are generated based on, pre-defined sets of values (denoted as “fundamental categories” herein), coping descriptors (denoted as “motivational coping techniques” herein), and the user's “most like’ or “least like” pre-determined set of behaviors or attitudes (denoted as a “set of attitudinal trait descriptions” herein). Refer to FIGS. 43 through 47, and 29,        
Awareness Level                The awareness level represents the vertical axis in the Relationship Anatomy Model in FIG. 30a through FIG. 30f.         
Autobiography Statement                An autobiography statement is a generated question directed to the user wherein the autobiography statement elicits a response from the user that guides the user in developing their personal autobiography.        
Confidence Level Indicator                The confidence level indicator (e.g., “high” or “low”) is selected by the user for various initial statements and questions that are presented in preparation for a user interaction on a discussion topic, wherein this indicator determines the level of difficulty that a user is likely to encounter in attempting to respond to the inquiries generated back to the user by the present invention. Refer to FIG. 48.        
Coping Evolution Requirements                Refer to the Detailed Description Of The Coping Evolution Requirements section.        
Discussion Generator                The discussion generator gathers input from the facilitator/user and generates output in the form of inquires back to the user which can include the user's “most like” or “least like” set of behaviors or attitudes (denoted as “attitudinal trait descriptions” herein) Refer to FIGS. 50 through 53.        
Discussion Topic                A discussion topic is defined by the user wherein the discussion topic is the subject in which the user would like to investigate. For example, such a discussion topic might be “my relationship with my wife, Karen”. Refer to FIG. 48.        
Discussion Topic Evaluation                A discussion topic evaluation evaluates or measures how well a user perceives the discussion topic (e.g., my relationship with my wife Karen) in which the user wishes to investigate. Refer to FIG. 48.        
Electronic Journal                The electronic journal is where the user may enter journal entries based on inquiries generated back to the user. Refer to FIGS. 50 through 53.        
Evaluation Procedure                The evaluation procedure refers to the user profile or motivational instrument facilitated by an expert in the field and given to a user of this system wherein the evaluation procedure is treated as input to the present invention. Refer to Appendix A.        
Fundamental Category                A fundamental category is an essential quality or virtue which represents one of multiple “ideal” ways to relate to a person, thing, or situation (In one embodiment, fundamental categories are defined as “confidence”, “patience”, “devotion”, and “honor” wherein such fundamentals are intended to represent an optimum relationship). The fundamental categories are nouns that are primarily defined by the facilitator (e.g., a person that assists a user in interacting with the present invention) in the FUNDAMENTAL CATEGORY CONSTRUCTOR 14 in FIG. 3. Refer to FIGS. 30b through 30f and the definition of The Relationship Anatomy Model in this section.        
Good Ranking Range                The user evaluates a situation, relationship, or issue (i.e., discussion topic) by ranking true/untrue statements from 1 to 10 and a good ranking range is a rank of 6 through 10. Refer to FIG. 48.        
Implied Rank                The implied rank is a rank calculated by this system based on the original rank entered by the user for a discussion topic.        
Inquiry                An inquiry is generated back to a user based on a user's discussion topic evaluation wherein the user reads the inquiry to help investigate ways to approach a given discussion topic. Refer to FIGS. 50 through 53.        
Linguistic Constructs Table                The Linguistic Constructs Table stores the data used to build inquires which are generated back to the user for investigation of the user's discussion topic and/or autobiography. Refer to FIG. 29 and the Detailed Description Of The Linguistic Constructs Table.        
Motivational Attribute                A motivational attribute (e.g., “need”) is an essential source or driver which serves to develop or evolve (more generally, determine) the aspects in a user's perception of a user-defined discussion topic.        
Motivational Coping Technique                A motivational coping technique (e.g., “allow”) is a verb (e.g., this verb must also have a capability to be used as a transitive verb) representing a motive which is intended to develop or evolve a user's perception of a user-defined discussion topic.        
Poor Ranking Range                The user evaluates a situation, relationship, or issue (i.e., discussion topic) by ranking true/untrue statements from 1 to 10 and a poor ranking range is a rank of 1 through 5. Refer to FIG. 48.        
Primary Motivational Coping Technique                A primary motivational coping technique (e.g., “allow”) is a representation of the primary motive for a generated inquiry, wherein the inquiry is intended to elicit a user response toward a (user) designated discussion topic, and wherein the primary motive is selected from a predetermined collection of textual representations, each textual representation describing a potential motivation that could be applicable to the user.        
Quadrant Cache                A quadrant cache is part of the Relationship Anatomy Model design. A quadrant cache represents a plurality of interchangeable variables and either a “low” or “high” awareness level or either “most-like” the user or “least-like” the user behaviors or attitudes. Refer to FIGS. 30a through 30f.         
Rank                A rank is a score that the user enters when evaluating a discussion topic. The rank entered is between 1 (e.g., mostly untrue) and 10 (e.g., mostly true). The rank entered either doesn't satisfy (e.g., a low rank) or satisfies (e.g., a high rank) the user's perception of the discussion topic. Refer to FIG. 48.        
Relationship Anatomy Model                The relationship anatomy model is a data model that, at least in one embodiment, enables a user to relate their perception of a user-defined situation, relationship, event, etc. (e.g., discussion topic) to the data model's predefined data organization, wherein this data organization includes related or “linked” data items, each data item identifying/describing an attribute or characteristic of the user's motivations and/or personal traits. Moreover, this data organization may be used by the user to investigate his/her perceptions regarding various discussion topics. In particular, each such data item can be from one (and only one) of the following components or classifications of the user's motivations and/or personal traits: fundamental categories, user states of mind, user motivational attributes, user motivational coping techniques, and the user's attitudinal trait descriptions. Accordingly, the relationship anatomy model's components or classification are used to generate meaningful inquiry's or questions to the user through a response algorithm. The response algorithm builds and generates inquiries back to the user based on the user's perception of the discussion topic, wherein these inquiries are built directly from the linkages of the data items of the user's specific relationship anatomy model. In addition, the Linguistic Constructs Table is designed based on the data organization of the relationship anatomy model. Refer to FIG. 30a through FIG. 30f, the Linguistic Constructs Table Detailed Description, and The Detailed Description Of The Coping Evolution Requirements for further description.        
Response Algorithm                The response algorithm calculates the user's perception of a discussion topic in relation to the Relationship Anatomy Model. The intention of the response algorithm is to reflect how a user perceives a discussion topic.        
Response Type                The response type represents how a user requests to receive an inquiry generated back to them based on a discussion topic evaluation. For one embodiment, a user may request an “empower” response type which produces an inquiry that represents the user's “strongest” perception of a discussion topic. Or alternatively, the user may request an “improve” response type which produces an inquiry that represents the user's “weakest” perception of a discussion topic. Refer to FIG. 48 and steps 68 through 72 of the Detailed Description Of The Invention.        
Set of Attitudinal Trait Descriptions                A set of attitudinal trait descriptions wherein these descriptions either represent how a user “most likely” behaves or “least likely” behaves according to the behavioral or motivational procedure (i.e., evaluation procedure).        
State of Mind                There are two ideal types of states of mind presupposed in at least some embodiments of the present invention. A “passive” state of mind represents a user's relaxed disposition (e.g., suggesting less effort). An “active” state of mind represents a user's active disposition (e.g., suggesting more effort). These states of mind are designed into the relationship anatomy model and provide a means of relating (in some cases with less effort (e.g., passively) and in some cases with more effort (e.g., actively)) the user's perception to a discussion topic. Refer to FIG. 30f.         
State of Mind Description                A state of mind description is made of one-word descriptors which represents a user's “passive” and “active” state of mind. For example, a “passive” state of mind description may be defined as: creativity, clarity, and satisfaction and an “active” state of mind may be defined as: freedom, vitality, connecting. These descriptions are used in the inquiries generated back to the user and they are defined with the facilitator or someone experienced in defining such descriptions.        
Sub-Rank                Sub-ranks are scores calculated by the response algorithm based on a rank entered by the user when evaluating a discussion topic. A sub-rank represents a user's set of behaviors or attitudes (i.e., set of attitudinal trait descriptions).        
True/Untrue Statement                One or more true/untrue statements are presented to a user that requires the user to enter specific criteria (e.g., rank, confidence level indicator of high or low, and a response type of empower or improve) for each statement when evaluating a discussion topic. Refer to FIG. 48.        